From: "hwenk" <hwenk-AT-web.de> To: <deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 14:11:41 +0200 Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence Hello, it is a little bit curious that you totally neglect, that in doing violence there is almost always someone who is seriously hurted, wounded or even killed. Therefore there is a barrier in almost all people which makes them hesitate or trying to avoid it. This is very direct related to the wish to be not hurted oneself and to regard the other as in certain ranges as similar. Psychological then we have normally identification. To be honest, this point is missing in your discussion of pure violence. This is done without any real argument and thus very unexpected. This is the reason why I resist so much on this basics, as I got the impression there is much carelessness concerning the real and painful suffering of the victims of pure violence. And this is in an intellectual advanced and dedicated to freedom and liberation discourse under academic educated or moralistic or political thinking people more than puzzling. Thus every more elaborated discourse allowing pure violence has a very strong burden to carry. The avoidance of violence comes from a kind of general love or passion or solidarity with the other people living on this earth. Therefore a discourse allowing pure violence has to involve a lot of affects. The only general accepted reason is self-defence, which is present in almost every justification for violence coming from official institutions. As I tried to point out, even riots or revolutions are related to this, as they try to keep the right of happiness which in its actual form is taken to be granted. The argumentation concerning the wish of almost all members to safety and the exclusion of pure violence explains why this pure violence in general nowadays fails and falls back to the violaters. There are in developed western democracies enough critical intellectuals and other possibilities to express and to defend the rights and needs of the people. So, pure violence nowadays in inner democratic conflicts are almost always harmful and mostly to explain by uncontrolled affects - most prominent revenge and impatience. This is a variant of "to narrow" pursuing one's interests. There is also no justification pointing to the very complicated questions around schizophrenia - which is actual some kind of collective noun. As I tried to express several times, most of them are very moralistic and intellectual minded. "We didn't see a schizophrenic until now" - said Deleuze and Guattari in the Anti-Oedipe. AS you know, mystical discourses and passions are almost totally ruled by the passion of love, so there is no justification of pure violence coming from this discourse. greetings Harald Wenk -----Original Message----- From: deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org [mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of NZ Sent: Dienstag, 28. Marz 2006 04:49 To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence true, I'm going kind of backwards, and thats confusing.... I am eager to plot thisstory, where to take violence thread, it is probably best to make sure we are talking about the same thing ... w/o aggreement violence will destroy understand (just 2 extra steps through the ethical ennead) okay, but to just peek at a tiny clue.... so, there was a garrulous attractive young woman who talked to breuer & gave freud the idea of developing their logos-centric (creepy talking on a couch) techniques of analyzing hysteria which turned into this general theory of unconscious repression that I can learn at any universe-ity...blab-blab-logos-blab. the "itty-bitty universe". (What is repression?) The next big jump is from schizophrenia to violence, and that's pretty much covered in D-G's anti-oedipus book). "Sovereign Violence" The best way to read wb's "violence" is backwards, (that way your hypocampus can accurately decode it for you to contemplate on your bus ride home from the library.) Was this essay written in 1921?, same year that the inventer of the television, Charles Francis Jenkins incorporates Jenkins Laboratories in Washington, D.C. with the purpose of "developing radio movies to be broadcast for entertainment in the home". (Re: Color in 1921) 1) How does wb's discussion (explicitly based) on darwin and spinoza, turn into a discussion on "Sovereign Violence"? Gee-wiz, was it WWI maybe? Why. "pure divine violence" vs "pure drivel violence" here the jihad can be defined in western terms: w/o warning "divine violence" has been realized. ths terrorizm is violating the laws of "mythic violence" that sovriegn modernity has assumed for itself. The fact that nuclear arms are not involved keeps it at this level. But indeed the entire cold-war/ arms-race, certainly remains as the current "pure divine violence". (I question whether "divine violence" is in fact also unalloyed violence.) At least if the sovereignty has alloyed itself to the spectacle of society. .. 2) ....is it a monocle for one-dimensional man? i like benj.... and he leaves me with lots more questions: 3) "ultimate insolubility of all legal problems" vs "psycho-analytical method", does this indicate benj. attitude towards the logos in general and could this provide the basis for a hypothetical debate between freud? 4) "law-making violence" vs "law-protecting violence" how come there is no "law-breaking violence" 5) is "mutatis mutandis" latin for "mother-fucker"? -------- soon we will have democracy someday soon, but that, like communisim, is a mere ideal, it does not exist, it never has, perhaps it will. (note-to-self: must read spinoza's social contract, what name is it called?) _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005